If you've read many of my 8000 posts on MDC or elsewhere, you'll find that I don't believe or embrace the blame/fault matrix. I'm not clear on how the parent deciding for the child is more honoring of the child's autonomy? My personal philosophy is to honor the child's autonomy; I understand if one can't see/imagine/believe how the child could be self-determining, as you are not living in our home. But, he is. That is the experience of our dynamic.

My husband's influence on me is huge, also. The final say for my body is mine. It is that simple. I certainly wouldn't withhold information which I believed to be important for ds's health, nor selectively provide information which could impair his ability to make an informed consent/dissent for himself. I trust that he trusts that. I honor his trust as sacred.

Pat

There is so much here that I can not relate to, but I am curious about the information provided for consent. Is that information similar in content to that provided to the parent (who is legally responsible for granting consent)? If not, how do you decide what your young child needs to know before granting his consent?

Also, of course it would not be the child's fault if surgery had a bad outcome. Similarly, it would not be my fault, or even necessarily the medical team's fault. But that doesn't mean the child, his or herself, wouldn't feel fault or blame for the decision. The parent may be evolved beyond fault and blame, but is the child? (not trying to make this specifically about you and your son....talking about children in general here.)

'Pat will not make her son do anything he doesn't want to do.'
'Pat will help her son to do anything he wants to do, including playing on a highway safely.'

'Pat could "manipulate" her child to have a surgery which she believes he needs, even if he doesn't want to have it. '

I acknowledge folks have those beliefs, although I don't agree with the third perspective. And I've never met a child who wanted to play on a busy highway.

What I find is, Where I put my energy is what grows. The intensity of energy spent on this thread could help anyone find solutions with their child, ime. We live together without the struggles others describe. That doesn't mean we don't have struggles, but we find solutions. And I don't feel the angst about honoring ds's autonomy that others post about. We are adept at problem solving, all of us are experienced and effective. And we use those skills in our community with everyone. CL works for us.

There is so much here that I can not relate to, but I am curious about the information provided for consent. Is that information similar in content to that provided to the parent (who is legally responsible for granting consent)? If not, how do you decide what your young child needs to know before granting his consent?

Well, I am no stranger to consensual living, I practiced it, to an often frustrating, unrealistic, stressful, and often resentful degree as I jumped through hoop after hoop of sacrificing my wants, needs, opinions, better judgment based on years of experience and life lessons and trips around the block, just to find a solution I was convincing myself was "mutually agreeable".

It wasn't, in fact, "mutually agreeable". It was a situation where I was eternally martyring myself in the purest sense of the word, to honor some ideology and dogma that, if practiced "correctly" would earn me the title of most caring, crunchy mother of the year.

So, what I do now, is act like a reasonable, sensible, rational human being who is committed to being gentle, but is not committed to reaching a consensus in every.cotton-swabbing.situation.that.crosses.my.parenting.path.

This means, in probably 95% of situations, an observer would probably label us a consensual family. We talk, reason, make collective decisions, honor impulses, meet needs, try to the best of our ability and comfort level to meet wants, don't shame, don't hit, blah blah blah and every other parenting principle that would make Peggy O'Mara proud.

However, there are certain situations where, when a three year old child is being incredibly short-sighted, unreasonable, rigid, and selfish (quite age and developmentally appropriate, and something in theory, I realize is a natural growing stage) -- where I just have to matter-of-factly pull the "mom" card for the sake of family harmony, my sanity, people in the grocery store's right to be in a scream-free environment -- you know, whatever the case.

I am not willing to make lunch a four hour long hostage negotiation, for example...until we come up with something my kid is happy with. Here are X,Y,Z thing we have that I know you like. THAT YOU ATE YESTERDAY (though I don't scream this, I am screaming it inside lol) -- if you don't want it, that's cool, but I am not going to go to the store and buy more food, cook four different things, endlessly discuss why it doesn't "feel" right to you vibrationally or whater.... here is what we have and there is yogurt in the fridge... ya know?

I am a great mama, I am so proud of my parenting journey. Consensual living is a good touchstone -- sort of a lighthouse in the dark of the direction I want to go if I am lost in a fog -- but I certainly don't think it is at all the perfect parenting principle.

I think in some ways, the principle can backfire. I felt before I abandoned the dogma for more of an instinctual, case by case form of discipline with a few absolutes (such as no hitting or shaming etc) that I was sending dd the message that absolutely NOTHING could be right or okay unless the situation ended with her being COMPLETELY happy with EVERYTHING she requested. That is where the pendulum can swing the other way with CL imo.

Parenting is not a dogma, it is a journey. It is not an ideology, it is a wonderful, sometimes messy, always interesting reality -- where not everything fits into a neat little package of mutually blissful agreements.

I am not a perfect mother but I am the absolute best mother for my daughter and I am absolutely okay with the occasional "no, we can't put the cat in the dryer and that's it" without endless discussion or trying to "meet her need" to experiment with feline quantum physics in a heat-filled and deadly environment

Our lives run so much more smoothly and peacefully now that I have this perspective.

"If you've read many of my 8000 posts on MDC or elsewhere, you'll find that I don't believe or embrace the blame/fault matrix. I'm not clear on how the parent deciding for the child is more honoring of the child's autonomy? My personal philosophy is to honor the child's autonomy; I understand if one can't see/imagine/believe how the child could be self-determining, as you are not living in our home. But, he is. That is the experience of our dynamic."

I have not read many of your 8000 posts and am not sure why they would be relevant as I was asking about your son's reaction to a decision that did not go the way he thought it would not your reaction.
I also did not say that the parent deciding for the child is more honoring of the child's autonomy.
What I am questioning is if say a 4 or 5 year old could be self-determining regarding a surgery when the parent wants the child to have the surgery and they are the one person the child trusts more than anyone else on earth and the one giving the child the information about the surgery.

Hmmm...well, I really didn't have an agenda for him to have the surgery. There were many options. Surgery was one of them. And it wasn't my body which would undergo the surgery. So, I don't believe it was my decision to make for his body, if he wanted to choose another alternative. We'd continue to discuss both of our concerns, not do the surgery against his will.

ETA: we just don't have a dynamic or relational experience with blame in our family. We don't "blame" ourselves or others, nor find "fault". We are concerned with the impact of our actions on others, but with awareness, not with a judgment paradigm of mistake/blame/fault.

Interesting. Dd knows a lot of that stuff, but nothing of the highly unlikely serious risks of her surgery. I wish I didn't know them, lol, but I need to know them to give informed consent. I just don't think she needs to know that stuff at 8.

Sometimes, ime, a definite must or must not is the kindest thing I can say to dd. I helps her to have those boundaries defined. She functions better in that world. So that def colors my perspective.

But an example that has to do with something I "must" do, but dd does not want me to do. I work 3 evenings a week (I teach a class, and love my job). Dd sometimes is very upset about me going to work. She would def prefer I not work, and makes those preferences clear. When I am at work, she is with dh and her brother, and she has a great time. But she still has difficulty anticipating and actually separating from me when I leave for work.

Still, I "must" leave for work at a certain time.

Do I have other options? Yes, I theoretically could go late or not at all. I could change jobs. I could not work altogether. But I love this job, and keeping it means I "must" leave at a certain time.

Could I address her underlying need so that this doesn't happen? Theoretically, yes, I am sure. But, despite my efforts, I haven't found a way in 8 years, and I "must" leave for work at a certain time.

So there we are. Maybe "must" is philosophically untrue, but it communicates my situation to dd in the only way that feels honest and true to me. And it feels kinder, too. I am not leaving because I am disregarding your feelings. I care about your feelings. And I still must leave now. I know you will be fine once I leave.

(I work in the evening because I SAH with ds during the day. I work when dh is home. We've had this system for years, including when dd was home as a young child, and later a homeschooler. Still, when she was home, she often objected to me going to work. Ds (2), otoh, says "You goin' to work? Bye!" lol)

That's not at all what I've experienced here. He doesn't expect a 'sing and dance' or whatever each and every single time it's not the slightest about this (and anyway we do not sing and dance when he's upset, that may mean a scratch/kick in our face actualy - lol). He LOVES to go out by car, he loves to be in the car when his dad is driving, most of the time. The times that he HAS a problem with being (fixed) in the car, it is not actually about the car, the seat nor the belt but about something else he wants/needs or doesn't want, or need. He expresses this frustration by not wanting to get into the car, the seat, or being belted. If you would analyse his need, you would get that he doesn't care about the belt at all! The solutions we have applied were most often giving him TIME to un-upset, by either waiting until he was ready (not complying, but ready) to get in the car, or stopping at the side of the road to be able to unbuckle him and giving him the opportunity and space for his rant (believe me it's hard on us, but not sth you can ignore either :-). Such a major upset may have been caused by a specific thing (wanting a cake another child had in her hand, whatever we often havn't got a clue at first) but with my son his tantruming evolves so enormously fast and heavily that the raging within seconds isn't about the cake or anything else specific (because everything additional may make him more upset, and even mentioning a single word as cake may make him upset even more because it's 'obvious you do not undrstand me at all'!) but about letting his frustration out. Once it is all out, he and us can go on. It requires patience. And us parents had to work much more on our patience with ds2, he is very high needs ioe. An underlying REASON for this frustration buildup may be a need for calm, rest, sleep (but hey do not forget not to mention these words - another need of our ds2: 'don't dare to TELL me what you think I need! And it's not true anyway! (even if it probably is...)). The tantruming makes him more tired if he already was so, thus he may actually fall asleep for a 15 min nap for the rest of the ride when we got on the road again. However, the scenario is not always the same :-).
The last car/car-seat CL failure was due to our refusal to give him more time, and not acknowledging his need for predictability enough, and not being present enough in finding a fitting solution :-(. And I can tell you that the solution here wouldn't have been one of persuasion either, but of a totaly different kind (I would get where I needed to go in another way, and if I thought I wouldn't 'make it' I might call to say I'd be a little late - but still 'in time' to do what I had to do wihout anyone missing out on it and -most of all saving our ds and ourselves a long lasting and fierce meltdown).

By "song and dance", I don't mean literally singing and dancing but suggesting one idea after another until the parent comes up with something that the child will agree with in order to get the child into the car seat. The time it takes to find a fitting solution. But then I raised a child who would not agree with any solution suggested to her even if it was one she would have accepted if she had been the one to suggest it. She would have said no just because I was the one who proposed it. And that's where my objections are coming from. Erica and Dylan are also children that will expect what happened last time to happen every time even when there is no time for negotiating an acceptable solution. We live in San Diego where we get fire storms. They move very fast. When we are told to evacuate, we sometimes have no time for anything but to get in the car and leave. I need for my children to accept that when told to get into their car seats they will do so without any discussions, no stiffening of the body. I require a cooperative child whether or not they want to.

Erica especially had conflicting needs as an infant. All infants require skin to skin touch in order to thrive. Erica also had a very real conflicting need to not to be touched. Despite this, I managed to breastfeed her for 9 months before conceding to her need for space. She was the only baby I knew of who nursed at arms length. When she was about 2 years old, we realized that we were only touching her when we were changing her, getting her dressed, etc. There were no hugs or cuddles. So we started the rule/ritual that she had to hug us, her parents, good morning and good night. On the surface, that sounds like a good CL solution. However, it was imposed on her, not mutually arrived at. There was no way in the world that she would have agreed to that on her own.

I agree that CL has its place in raising children. I have allowed my children to have appropriate autonomy over their lives. There have been areas that I and their dad have reserved for us to decide. Areas that we have slowly over the years given over to them as they got older. So that by the time they were 18, they were making most decisions on their own with as much or as little input from us that they wanted. We did reserve the right of parental veto up to their 18th birthday simply because up to then, by law, we were responsible for their actions.

Well, I am no stranger to consensual living, I practiced it, to an often frustrating, unrealistic, stressful, and often resentful degree as I jumped through hoop after hoop of sacrificing my wants, needs, opinions, better judgment based on years of experience and life lessons and trips around the block, just to find a solution I was convincing myself was "mutually agreeable".

It wasn't, in fact, "mutually agreeable". It was a situation where I was eternally martyring myself in the purest sense of the word, to honor some ideology and dogma that, if practiced "correctly" would earn me the title of most caring, crunchy mother of the year.

So, what I do now, is act like a reasonable, sensible, rational human being who is committed to being gentle, but is not committed to reaching a consensus in every.cotton-swabbing.situation.that.crosses.my.parenting.path.

This means, in probably 95% of situations, an observer would probably label us a consensual family. We talk, reason, make collective decisions, honor impulses, meet needs, try to the best of our ability and comfort level to meet wants, don't shame, don't hit, blah blah blah and every other parenting principle that would make Peggy O'Mara proud.

However, there are certain situations where, when a three year old child is being incredibly short-sighted, unreasonable, rigid, and selfish (quite age and developmentally appropriate, and something in theory, I realize is a natural growing stage) -- where I just have to matter-of-factly pull the "mom" card for the sake of family harmony, my sanity, people in the grocery store's right to be in a scream-free environment -- you know, whatever the case.

I am not willing to make lunch a four hour long hostage negotiation, for example...until we come up with something my kid is happy with. Here are X,Y,Z thing we have that I know you like. THAT YOU ATE YESTERDAY (though I don't scream this, I am screaming it inside lol) -- if you don't want it, that's cool, but I am not going to go to the store and buy more food, cook four different things, endlessly discuss why it doesn't "feel" right to you vibrationally or whater.... here is what we have and there is yogurt in the fridge... ya know?

I am a great mama, I am so proud of my parenting journey. Consensual living is a good touchstone -- sort of a lighthouse in the dark of the direction I want to go if I am lost in a fog -- but I certainly don't think it is at all the perfect parenting principle.

I think in some ways, the principle can backfire. I felt before I abandoned the dogma for more of an instinctual, case by case form of discipline with a few absolutes (such as no hitting or shaming etc) that I was sending dd the message that absolutely NOTHING could be right or okay unless the situation ended with her being COMPLETELY happy with EVERYTHING she requested. That is where the pendulum can swing the other way with CL imo.

Parenting is not a dogma, it is a journey. It is not an ideology, it is a wonderful, sometimes messy, always interesting reality -- where not everything fits into a neat little package of mutually blissful agreements.

I am not a perfect mother but I am the absolute best mother for my daughter and I am absolutely okay with the occasional "no, we can't put the cat in the dryer and that's it" without endless discussion or trying to "meet her need" to experiment with feline quantum physics in a heat-filled and deadly environment

Our lives run so much more smoothly and peacefully now that I have this perspective.

Interesting question and I'm not sure where we stand in this. We try to allow our daughter (3.5yrs) to make decisions and I don't want to force her in to anything she doesn't want, BUT it's too hard to let her make decisions all the time. She's only 3 and she doesn't realize that she HAS to brush her teeth because she's had cavities. She didn't realize that we needed to have her teeth drilled as much as she hated it. She doesn't always like leaving when I really need to leave to get something done. She doesn't like cleaning up after herself. She insists on always sleeping in between my husband and I and sometimes I have to insist that she sleeps on the end... She also isn't mature enough at 3.5 to realize that when she stays up as late as dh and I, she totally falls apart emotionally. Or that when she watches lots of tv or eats lots of sweets, she becomes an irritable grumpy little girl. so I don't know where that puts us.

Interesting. Dd knows a lot of that stuff, but nothing of the highly unlikely serious risks of her surgery. I wish I didn't know them, lol, but I need to know them to give informed consent. I just don't think she needs to know that stuff at 8.

We don't talk about the statistical risk of being killed in a MVA every time we get in a car; nor the unlikely risk of dying, losing a limb, having a concussion, etc, each time we cross the street safely; or the chance of a tornado killing us when they come through our area. We don't focus on fear, but on benefits and safe practices. It is an energy thing, not a statistical explanation.

If there were significant life-threatening risks, we'd absolutely discuss the pros and cons of the alternatives, in simplistic terms. Just as in the hospital, we explained to patients, 'the risk of not having the procedure/surgery is much greater than the risk of having the procedure'. And if there are questions or concerns, we'd clarify specifics. Not delineate each potential which is an unlikely occurrence. Surgery is generally deemed "safe" in a controlled setting. Emergency surgery for unstable patients is very different than what we dealt with, with our son.

We talk about safety and provide an environment which doesn't create fear of "highly unlikely serious risks" of living. The risks associated with general anesthesia for a non-life threatening issue are "highly unlikely serious risks". Basically, fewer than 1:100,000 in hospital sedation leads to significant co-morbid outcomes. (yes, I really know that statistic, lol) Ds and most parents are not given that level of detail.http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/cJnoSZt...0Analgesia.pdf

I voted Mostly Consensual. DD is nearly 3.5 years old and we try and keep everyone's needs met but sometimes that means that we can't all be happy. Sometimes the medicine must go down, but I will try 20 or more different ways to get it down as easily and happily as possible. DD has almost always been accomodating. I can count on just a few fingers the number of times I've had to force her to do anything. My hope is the older she grows the more autonomy and self-direction to give her but for now I provide the structure and give her as much self-determination and choices within that framework as possible.

Allison: a little bit Waldorf, a little bit Medievalish, and always"MOMMMMYYYY!" to sweet Cecily since 12.22.05

Wow, just want to say forced hugging pushes my hot button as my father went "too far", shall we say. He felt his "need" to touch our (sister and my) body overrode our "need" for body integrity and autonomy of body space. I really could never force "affection" on another. The cognitive dissidence of that could create dissociation from one's inner knowing. It did for me. Self-control of one's own body is a huge value to me. I model that.

I feel fortunate, that my son around the age of 19 months was able to show me without a doubt that he knew what was and was not best for his body. It was a life threatening situation and he chose what he knew was right for him...which was probably not what I would have chosen and likely my choice may have ended up with a horrible outcome.

Of course, he had shown me before by indicating his hunger, need for physical closeness, etc. but that particular experience really gave me a way to really understand the idea that each of us knows ourselves better than anyone else ever could.

I guide my children and I provide information for them...but at the end of the day, I allow them to make the decisions that feel right for them...even when it's hard for me.

Time and time again, they have shown me they do know best, they don't go to extremes and they really do know better sometimes than me.

I realize my parenting choices are a bit extreme for some. I hear it from my extended family regularly. I do feel blessed though that my child was willing and able to show me through that experience many years ago and helped me choose the path that feels best for me.

Whatever method of parenting feels right for each of us is what we need to do.

too many choices overwhelm. that is an example. we usualy do two choices. we get things done very quickly. Come visit me if you think CL is time consuming. SOMETIMES it is, but in the long run that time invested pays off tenfold. then again, we aren't really CL, we are somewhere in between just more consensualish.

My son can get ready for school and out the door within 15 minutes including eating breakfast. He gets choices during this time. It doesnt slow us down at all.

That has not been the case for us with a 9, 7, 4, 2, and baby due Easter who has yet to arrive. It has been EXTREMELY time consuming for to be consentual in our home.

I prefer a hierarchy with rules. However, the arbitrariness in rules for children is actually a pet peeve of mine. Such as I would never tell my child "You have to finish your green beans before you go outside." That is not a rule, it is a command/demand and it is arbitrary. A rule would be "You always have to finish your vegetables" which while consistent would be a burden on the child and would be unenforceable for the most part. I think children are entitled to consistency in rules. Such as "Indoor voice for inside, outdoor voice for outside." It can be enforced consistently, and the child can pretty much rely on the fact that if they are inside they cannot holler, and if they are outside it will pretty much be ok. The number of rules is important too, and the parent has to prioritize those that are most imporant and be very consistent on those. More than 10 "rules" is probably too much for a young child. More than 5 "rules" for a toddler is too much. I fully expect to move on to a consensual household at high school age with my kids unless they show me that they have a preference for structure.

Well, I agree 100% with that. Forcing hugs or anything similar is not even remotely part of our parenting. We do have some absolutes in our parenting, as said above -- that is one of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WuWei

Wow, just want to say forced hugging pushes my hot button as my father went "too far", shall we say. He felt his "need" to touch our (sister and my) body overrode our "need" for body integrity and autonomy of body space. I really could never force "affection" on another. The cognitive dissidence of that could create dissociation from one's inner knowing. It did for me. Self-control of one's own body is a huge value to me. I model that.

We talk about safety and provide an environment which doesn't create fear of "highly unlikely serious risks" of living. The risks associated with general anesthesia for a non-life threatening issue are "highly unlikely serious risks". Basically, fewer than 1:100,000 in hospital sedation leads to significant co-morbid outcomes. (yes, I really know that statistic, lol) Ds and most parents are not given that level of detail.

The risk that I am keeping from my dd, specific to her surgery, is a 1:5000 risk of loss of vision (an infection risk). My mom was an anesthetist, so I am pretty solid on the anesthesia risks. And, yes, the 1:5000 detail was disclosed to me in the office, by the surgeon, when we were electing surgery. She felt it is important for me to know before I consent to the surgery--and I agree! But I'm not going to tell dd.

I do agree with this, for me and my family. Dd refused to hug/kiss many family members for years, and we insisted they respect that. I remember refusing my father's kisses, because I didn't like his scratchy face. I know now how sad that made him (he didn't have a beard or anything--I was just sensitive to the slightest stubble), but he never forced it.

The risk that I am keeping from my dd, specific to her surgery, is a 1:5000 risk of loss of vision (an infection risk). My mom was an anesthetist, so I am pretty solid on the anesthesia risks. And, yes, the 1:5000 detail was disclosed to me in the office, by the surgeon, when we were electing surgery. She felt it is important for me to know before I consent to the surgery--and I agree! But I'm not going to tell dd.

I'm no expert on strabismus, I believe that was the specific diagnosis, not amblyopia? And I believe that there is much controversy about the eye patch "treatments". So, I'd have to look much deeper into the alternatives of non-surgical interventions. And I recall concerns about later correction. However, the surgery is cosmetic, not corrective of vision? If you'd like, I could do some hunting about this. I recall we had a long discussion on Always Unschooled a few years back. There was a mom with this issue which was "uncorrected" during childhood, but addressed with vision therapy as an adult. As I recall, the issue was related to depth perception and coordination of her eyes together, hand-eye coordination for sports. She is an amazingly successful and independent computer guru. So, she hadn't experienced negativity related to the visual discrepancy. She drives, etc.

I assume there has been investigation for physiologic underlying causes, such as tumors or genetic predispositions. Not meaning to second guess, I just am a non-interventionist and seek information for a fully informed decision making process.

When I investigated the "Lasik" corrective eye surgery for myself, and examined the actual research studies related to the different surgical techniques, I found that the most recent (ie, least long-term post-op outcome results) types of corrective surgery (using different techniques, skills, tools) procedures had VERY different outcomes from those which had been utilized for years. There were definite pros and cons to considering "new" progressive surgical techniques, dependent upon the surgeon's training and experience than "old" techniques with more long-term outcomes known.

So, I'd want to understand the duration of the specific surgical technique utilized (both historically and by that specific surgeon), and the number of children my child's age which had been tested/studied, their side-effects (halos, death, loss of vision etc.), and need for repeated surgery, results over what period of follow-up. The surgery is always an alternative in the future, from what I recall. I was shocked at the number of Lasik patients which required *repeated* surgeries to improve vision and decrease side-effects, some without benefit, for instance. (as you can probably tell, I opted out of having surgery on my eyes. I imagine loss of vision to be a huge detriment to quality of life.) From a quick Google, the risk of death appeared to be 1:20,000. http://www.eyecareforchildren.com/strabismus.html

I would want my child to be aware that there was a risk of loss of vision based upon those statistics, personally. Is the procedure done as an outpatient in an eye clinic, or in a major hospital? Location impacts anesthesia risks significantly, due to inadequate emergency personnel in the clinic setting, assuming general anesthesia or "conscious sedation".

I do agree with this, for me and my family. Dd refused to hug/kiss many family members for years, and we insisted they respect that. I remember refusing my father's kisses, because I didn't like his scratchy face. I know now how sad that made him (he didn't have a beard or anything--I was just sensitive to the slightest stubble), but he never forced it.

Forcing a hug was one of the things Rain's dad did that made me the most furious at him. She was 4, and he had only been out of prison 6 months or so, so she wasn't used to spending much time with him (he lived at a halfway house). He always wanted hugs and kisses, and she often said no, and I insisted that he respect that... he wasn't happy about it, because he thought being her father entitled him to those things, but he had no choice. One day, though, we were getting ready to drive home after visiting with him, and I had strapped Rain into her carseat in the back seat and was getting into the driver's seat, and he had the opposite back door open and was saying good-bye to her... and then he leaned in and gave her a big hug and kiss, and of course because she was strapped in she couldn't get away, and he did it so quickly that I couldn't stop him.

And then he gave this laugh, like, "Oh, see how clever I was!" - and she was yelling "No!" and I was yelling UA violations... and 12 years later, I still remember it so clearly. It just seemed like the such an incredible violation of her personal boundaries. I had tried to talk to him about it rationally, saying that I wanted her to be clear that she had the right to say who got to touch her body and in what ways, and bringing up her being 16 and dating... and of course he didn't see that as the same thing at all, because he was her father, and he believed this gave him "rights" to hug and kiss her.

Sort of a tangent, I know... and I was sure she would be reluctant to be strapped into her carseat after that, but she wasn't... we did agree to lock the doors before strapping her in next time.

The surgery will be at Duke. Yes, strabismus, genetic (my dad has it, and has been pushing for the surgery for years).

We haven't tried vision therapy, but after years of unsuccessful chiro (cranio-sacral), I am very skeptical.

No, the surgery is not completely cosmetic. Her vision is perfect in both eyes, but she has trouble using them together. She gets double vision, headaches, eye strain, and it negatively affects her enjoyment of reading, etc.

Ummm...we live in the real world and ds hasn't been running into a busy highway.

We live in the real world too and my nephew died running on the road when he was 5 years old. Perhaps we live in different worlds. Perhaps that is the crux of the problem here. Perhaps his mother just wasn't consensual enough and had she been, he would never have had such a fatal need to run onto the road, it must be her fault... heaven knows I'm a master at this whole parenting thing and my child is so damned whole and complete she'd never do something so outrageous. Which is obvious testament to my parenting skeeeeels. Mad skeeeels.

My examples have been scoffed at and to that I say, count your blessings. It's a good idea to trust that some parents do reach the point where there are no more consensual solutions to some problems. They keep being told “yes there is”, that basically they're wrong, yet their experiences say the opposite. There is absolutely nothing this premise is based on. Well, personal experience is perhaps what it is based on, but I'm assuming it is more like the game Telephone and someone said “there are always consensual options” and it is sent down the line from person to person and each one takes it on faith that the person before them knew what they were saying.

I'm hearing there are always consensual options because “I've always found one.” I'm hearing consensual solutions always exist because you cannot prove they don't (ie, you just didn't manage to find one).

Why do I care? Because of the mothers who are stressed out trying to be the best mother they can be... they sling, cosleep, nurse for years, always attend to crying, pay for expensive schools or sacrifice a career to homeschool... they give and they bloody well give and they hear that you can “always find a consensual solution” and they knock themselves out trying to reach one in all situations as it is considered the best thing for their child. Then everyone has a good ol' giggle at a poor mama who writes a post asking if they should stop their child eating crayons because they can't find a consensual way to stop it... and they hear, “Of course you stop them, what the hell is wrong with you? You can't blame CL, you're obviously not looking hard enough, I'M willing to look for solutions, there is ALWAYS a consensual solution... too fatigued to work it out? Then get some sleep, look after your own needs too, and thrust your child at whoever will take them whenever you need to and your AP dreams be buggered... what dogma? What guidelines? I'm just telling you what I'D do! ...”

Hunger is political. Wherever there is widespread hunger, it is because people with guns are preventing other people from bringing in food.

Regarding surgery and getting permission from the child, at what age do we deem the child capable of consenting? Before they can talk, but can give non-verbal cues? Or do we make that decision for them up to a certain age, say 3, or up to a certain milestone, say talking? What if a child can't understand yet but can talk, does that count, or does only consent count? Do we ASSume we know when the child understands?

I suggest reading the book Magical Child for a very complex look at how we possibly damage our children by forcing them into logic too early but more relevant to this post, the damage done by introducing the concept of death too early. When that concept reaches a child, it is a huge shift in their consciousness... meeting our own mortality takes with it enormous chunks of innocence.

Such information isn't necessary, spare them that kind of complex abstract reasoning.

My parents protected me from so many things like that and I certainly would not go back and have them expose me to all their personal problems, reasons why I had to do certain things, decision making beyond my years (or interest)... my brain was free, my mind was free, my childhood was a fairytale. I lived in a different world and had very very little stress as my parents protected me from all that. And whodathunkit, I still grew up to function in the real world.

I can't see what the possible benefit is in all this sharing that is supposedly going on with the innocent youth. Why do it? I mentioned I didn't tell my daughter why I couldn't go at 7.30 and one of the responses was “I tell my child everything”... Jeebus! This is a good thing? Sorry, I don't buy it. In no way can I see that as a good thing. I share more with my 7 year old than I did when she was 3, and I suspect our relationship will follow my mother's and mine in that it grew into a friendship, into where I learned her more intimate thoughts and motives as I matured. I swear people keep forgetting that age is significant, and what you share with a two year old is nothing like what you share with a ten year old.

How does one protect the child against too much information too early and at the same time, give all that information required to make a decision on something like surgery? As adults, we can't call it informed consent if they do not fully hear or understand all the aspects of the situation. Children cannot give that kind of consent, depending on age. I always seek my daughter's consent where possible (such as if she is conscious and receptive), but I do not see that as anything other than her expressing her understanding that something is about to happen. It isn't at all based on assuming she has and understands all the facts, the post operative this and that and morbid other details. She is a HSC anyway, it would reduce her to a puddle on the floor.

Hunger is political. Wherever there is widespread hunger, it is because people with guns are preventing other people from bringing in food.

Correct me if I'm wrong...It has seemed to me through this thread that an option is included even if it is against a mama's very fabric of morals, or her religion, or her gut instinct, let alone her preferences. It seemed that a mama has (selfishly?) chosen to disregard a perfectly good consensual option if she doesn't include such unacceptables as options. For instance, a baby doesn't want to go in the car seat and someone suggests the baby stay with a friend so both initial desires are met (mama gets out and baby doesn't have to go). There is a friend available, but you have a reason you don't consider that an option, (perhaps you don't trust them, or perhaps you are trying to raise them AP and the friend wouldn't hold them the whole time... whatever, basically a fair reason) but according to this discussion, it still IS a consensual option, the parent just isn't taking it. So therefore, it is included even though the mama would never consider it an option. Is this true?

I wanted to mention that my use of the word matrix in an earlier post is the origin of the word, which means “womb”, and is the root of the word “matter” - and it is the source of words like mater (meaning mother). When I say I am my children's matrix, it means that I was their literal matrix (womb), but I am still their matrix on the outside, my body still protects them, my awareness and intuition is used to keep them safe. I still do not see evidence that the removal of this power structure is beneficial. (note I said power, not force) Is there any evidence?

Power: ability to do or act; capability of doing or accomplishing something. 1Power: (n) ability, power (possession of the qualities (especially mental qualities) required to do something or get something done) "danger heightened his powers of discrimination" 2

Hunger is political. Wherever there is widespread hunger, it is because people with guns are preventing other people from bringing in food.

Thanks Pat. It's been quite a week. Although you could say the same, I'm sure.

Disturbingly apropos how this discussion turned with what's going on for me at the moment. DD has an MRI tomorrow that may require a bung. The last time DD had a bung/needle, she convulsed from shock, eyes rolled back in her head, the whole nine... absolutely NOTHING consensual about it, as it took four docs and nurses to hold her down. Needless to say, although it is years since then, I am not looking forward to the many possibilities awaiting us tomorrow.

Hunger is political. Wherever there is widespread hunger, it is because people with guns are preventing other people from bringing in food.